- Cuyahoga County (Ohio) (x)
- Butcher, Fred (x)
- Flannery, Daniel (x)
- Search results
Search results
Show moreThis brief explains how the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office and the research team collaborated to identify individuals who owe DNA, swab eligible offenders who owe, and followed up after their DNA is entered into CODIS. This reporting addresses the issues that arise when lawfully owed DNA is not collected from offenders, explains the process by which we conducted a census of individuals who lawfully owe their DNA, articulates the outcomes of conducting the census (e.g., statistics on the number of individuals who owe their DNA in Cuyahoga County), and recommends approaches that other jurisdictions (within and beyond Ohio) could take to address issues in collecting lawfully owed DNA.
Show less
Show moreIn this research brief, we detail the process by which previously unsubmitted SAKs advance through four phases—testing, investigation, prosecution, and disposition—on the Cuyahoga County SAK Task Force (Task Force). We describe the key steps in the process, providing statistics on the number of cases that proceed or fail to proceed as well as the reasons why cases fail to proceed. The purpose of this research brief is to aid other jurisdictions that are processing their previously unsubmitted SAKs in visualizing the processing from testing to disposition, collecting performance measures at each step in the process, and establishing comparable statistics across jurisdictions. This will aid in forecasting how many SAKs will likely include DNA hits, how many investigations should be completed, and how many should result in indictments and convictions, which can then be used for allocating resources, informing end-dates, communicating updates and expectations, and, hopefully, helping ensure no new “backlog” develops. Additionally, we have provided statistics in this brief to aid other jurisdictions in knowing what comes after testing.
Show less
Show moreIt is a common belief among law enforcement and prosecutors that serial sex offenders maintain a consistent modus operandi (MO), or offending pattern. The standard investigative practices in many law enforcement agencies are to either investigate a sexual assault allegation as an isolated event or use the offender’s MO to link other sexual assaults possibly committed by that offender. However, recent research from the Cuyahoga County Sexual Assault Kit research team at Case Western Reserve University is calling this practice into question. In our recently published paper in the Journal of Criminal Justice “Offending patterns for serial sex offenders identified via the DNA testing of previously unsubmitted sexual assault kits,” we present findings showing that serial sex offenders frequently assault both strangers and nonstrangers, and often drastically vary their MO across assaults. In this paper, we discuss our findings and why these findings contradict standard practices for investigating sexual assault, provide recommendations for changing how law enforcement investigates sexual assault based on these findings, and include a discussion of the larger implications of this research for collecting and testing kits and following up on the results of the testing.
Show less
Show moreIn this research brief, we assess the integration of victim advocacy on the Cuyahoga County Sexual Assault Kit Task Force (Task Force). The Task Force created a multidisciplinary team (MDT) to focus solely on cold cases of sexual assaults, and the MDT uniquely incorporates victim advocates. The research team observed how the victim advocates influenced the MDT to assess (a) the integration of the victim advocates into a Task Force, (b) how well victim-centered behaviors and attitudes were exhibited by all members of the Task Force, and (c) whether people believed the integration of advocates or victim-centeredness impacted the Task Force outcomes. The findings highlight the utility of including victim advocates as full team members and how their participation influences investigation and prosecution. Recommendations are provided for other jurisdictions interested in implementing victim advocates onto their cold case investigations.
Show less
Show moreStarting in 2016, Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office and the research team collaborated to identify individuals who owe DNA, swab eligible offenders who owe, and followed up after their DNA is entered into CODIS. This brief focuses on the second and third phases this project—the swabbing, the following up, and disseminating the results. As an assessment of the efficacy of changes to practice, this report explains the process and outcomes of swabbing and submitting swabs of individuals who owe DNA in Cuyahoga County and the outcomes of what happened after a person’s DNA was entered into CODIS. The findings and recommendations serve as a framework for other jurisdictions addressing their issues with owed DNA.
Show less
